Table 10.

Comparison of our proposed approach with the state-of-the-art approaches.

Dataset		Method	AUC	Precision	Recall
Cambridge	Asymptomatic	Brown et al. [12]	0.80	0.72	0.69
		Proposed (RFECV + Extra-Trees)	0.88	0.75	0.81
		Proposed (RFECV + HGBoost)	0.85	0.76	0.73
	Symptomatic	Brown et al. [12]	0.87	0.70	0.90
		Muhammad et al. [35]	-	0.87	0.82
		Proposed (RFECV + Extra-Trees)	0.95	1	0.91
		Proposed (RFECV + HGBoost)	0.81	0.93	0.80
Coswara		Proposed (RFECV + Extra-Trees)	0.64	0.70	0.58
		Proposed (RFECV + HGBoost)	0.66	0.76	0.47
Virufy		Proposed (RFECV + Extra-Trees)	0.92	0.89	0.88
		Proposed (RFECV + HGBoost)	0.94	0.89	0.98
Virufy + NoCoCoDa		Melek [41]	0.99	0.99	0.97
		Proposed (RFECV + Extra-Trees)	0.97	1	0.92
		Proposed (RFECV + HGBoost)	0.98	0.99	0.98
Combined dataset		Proposed (RFECV + Extra-Trees)	0.79	0.61	0.67
		Proposed (RFECV + HGBoost)	0.78	0.61	0.66

-Bold values indicate the highest.